Democracy-->no terrorism?

Watching the VP debate, I am struck by a statement that Vice President Cheney made twice: that establishment of a Democratic government will somehow end terrorism in Iraq. I believe he considered this to be obvious.

What is the basis for this? By common definition, "the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature" is considered "terrorism." History shows that Democratic nations' interests and policies are at least as likely to do this as non-democratic governments, and there are many examples in our own backyard.

One aspect of our choice for leadership in the upcoming election is to consider the Bush administration's near-sighted policy of using inappropriate levels of money, power, and violence to promote Democracy and to "fix" problems in countries (Iraq, Afghanistan) whose unrest and anger has been substantially exacerbated, if not caused in the first place, by inappropriate money, power, and violence.

Compare the Bush administration's brash commitment to military bravado with the Democratic Party's 2004 commitment to deploy, "in addition to military might, ALL that is in America's arsenal--our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas." In John Kerry we have a leader who has the depth and breadth of experience (in peace/war, ecology and economics) to allow us to combat the deep causes of terrorism, not be locked into stubbornly forcing U.S. image at all costs.

Suicide is a very common component of today's terrorism. This is significant. Medical experts know that in treating suicide, you can't treat the disease, you have to work with the environment. It's the distress of the global environment that underlies this social earthquake we are embroiled in. Attention to environmental issues is the only way to make a long-term difference. Here, again, is a clear difference between the Bush administration, which is systematically dismantling environmental practice at home and abroad, and Kerry/Edwards, which sees the environmental effort as a significant part of the social/political/economic picture.